BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Laboratory >

Gulf War Syndrome

  
 
grant
16:27 / 15.07.04
My thinking about this was just spurred on by this New Scientist article about plummeting fertility rates among Gulf War vets.

Officially, I think there’s still no such thing as Gulf War Syndrome… it’s just that the soldiers who fought in that conflict get all kinds of weird medical problems.

Like… Failure to conceive was rare, but was significantly more common for the Gulf veterans. They failed 2.5 per cent of the time, versus 1.7 per cent for non-Gulf colleagues. In 3.4 per cent of Gulf veterans, and 2.3 per cent of the others, pregnancies miscarried.
A few men had been examined, and had sperm abnormalities. Work in the US found similar abnormalities in rats exposed to cocktails of insecticide, insect repellant and the nerve gas antidote pyridostigmine also experienced by Gulf soldiers.

The questionnaires also asked the soldiers to describe their general health since the war. As in similar studies, the Gulf veterans are in worse health than their colleagues: 61 per cent had at least one new symptom since the war, compared to 37 per cent of non-Gulf veterans.


So… a lump of questions:
* What else is going on? What other health problems have been found?

* What do you think governments can do about this sort of thing? What *should* they do?

* What are the soldiers’ rights? What can those who serve expect in return?
 
 
flufeemunk effluvia
21:45 / 15.07.04
There is the Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome buisiness... I hear how at places like Walter Reed they don't do shit about the psychological needs of vets. This war is just gonna leave another group if dissaffected ignored vets.

Fuck, that kind of belonged in Switchboard...
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
11:24 / 16.07.04
How much is hypochondria brought on by a decade and a half of hearing abour Gulf War Syndrome? I tend towards thinking there is a genuine problem that needs to be dealt with, but I'm wondering how much is the equivelent of hearing a report on increasing incidences of some disease or condition and then starting to worry when you show one particular symptom...
 
 
grant
18:07 / 16.07.04
Well, the chronic-fatiguey kind of symptoms might well have been extensions of some kind of hypochondria, but I don't see how fertility changes could be anything but evidence of some sort of physical/physiological agent.
 
 
Lord Morgue
02:58 / 17.07.04
Just how much depleted uranium did we leave lying around last time we blew up Iraq? We ARE appreciative of the fact that the shit is not really "depleted", as in "gone through a reactor and been all used up", but is really what is left over from the enriching process used to make fuel rods and is still radioative?
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
18:17 / 17.07.04
Officially, I think there’s still no such thing as Gulf War Syndrome… it’s just that the soldiers who fought in that conflict get all kinds of weird medical problems.

I'm not really able to comment on the specific medical elements of this but Gulf War Syndrome is a fully legally recognised condition in the US and a number of other interested countries (i.e. those that sent troops in Gulf War I). However, it's current status is still in a certain degree of contention. It's has been recognised by a judge in the RCJ under an appeal but is still open to appeal which I understand has been filed.

Furthermore what we now know as Gulf War Syndrome will have to become Gulf War I Syndrome as it can't be applied to any illnesses, diseases or disorders which develop from the recent invasion and current occupation due to the differences in warfare methods from 10 years ago, specifically with reference to the chemical warfare side.
 
 
grant
17:34 / 19.07.04
...Gulf War Syndrome is a fully legally recognised condition in the US ...been recognised by a judge in the RCJ under an appeal but is still open to appeal which I understand has been filed.

So, recognized in the US but not all the way in England yet? I wonder if there have been any successful lawsuits....

This encyclopedia article implies that the Veterans' Administration recognizes the syndrome, but this news article from 2001 says it isn't officially recognized. And this article says a British appeal tribunal officially recognized it in 2002.

Confusing. I think maybe it is officially recognized now, at least in the US & England, although getting classified as "disabled" by the VA is a real chore.

Oh, wow -- check GulfLink.org out. Yeah, there's like a pitched battle between the administration and the vets over this:

July 14th, 2004: The British Gulf War syndrome inquiry
is being labeled a hoax by veterans seeing that its being stopped
from doing its job by key government officials. ...

Amazingly enough, everyone including the American veterans miss
the announcement of a study that shows Gulf War veterans are 8 times
more likely to develop CFS than non-Gulf War veterans.
Which is significant.
...
June 10th, 2004: Lance Corporal Alex Izett, a 34 yr old
Scot on a seven week hunger strike is facing possible
death to get the MOD to recognize "Gulf War Syndrome".

"I'm not interested in compensation. My health has been
taken. Money is not going to bring my health back, it is my dignity".


Here's a study showing that Gulf War sufferers definitely have compromised immune systems, and that condition may be linked to chronic fatigue syndrome. So there's a scientific basis for it existing.

Anyway, the encyclopedia article says (and the journal stuff seems to confirm) that no one's sure what causes it. It might be depleted uranium, it might be leishmaniasis (carried by flies), it might have a genetic component, it might be "G Nerve Agent".

------

Furthermore what we now know as Gulf War Syndrome will have to become Gulf War I Syndrome as it can't be applied to any illnesses, diseases or disorders which develop from the recent invasion ....

Let's hope so, anyway. I don't know what has changed that would result in a different risk of, what, "infection"? "contamination"? just because I don't know what actually causes the original condition. And I think it'd be a couple years before the new round of vets start noticing symptoms. So.
 
 
Lord Morgue
02:26 / 20.07.04
I always thought it might be a cumulative effect, from low-level background traces of what we used (Depleted uranium, not only as A.P. ammo, but as an incendary device), and whatever Saddam had in all those military stockpiles and factories we blew (nerve agents, we know he had those; chemical and nuclear materials). I'd be interested to know health issues among the Iraqi population all this time, if they'd just stop blowing up health workers...
 
 
Lord Morgue
02:28 / 20.07.04
Or biological, he might have had biological. We know what happens when you cop a lethal, or near-miss from all these lovely things, but low-level exposure over several months? Anyone's guess.
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
10:41 / 26.07.04
Medical research is indicating that Gulf War Syndrome is possibly due, in part to pre-theatre treatment of troops.

I've read a lot of medical evidence relating to tribunal cases on GWS and it is a very complicated field. i'd say more but there is the official secrets act to be adhered to.
 
 
Lord Morgue
13:07 / 26.07.04
I've heard the anti-nerve-agent drugs they use, like Atropine, have some nasty side effects.
I also heard troops in the first Gulf War were issued tags like you wear if you work in a nuclear reactor, that have to be developed like film, to see how much radiation you've absorbed. After handing them in, when they asked what the results were, the response was "What tags?".
I'm kind of hoping that someone made that one up...
 
 
grant
13:02 / 27.07.04
Get a load of this -- just came out today.

Nature: Gulf Syndrome Research is Fucked.

Britain's Ministry of Defence has asked scientists studying Gulf War veterans' illnesses to withhold some of their findings from an ongoing investigation into the mysterious affliction.

The independent inquiry, which started on 12 July, aims to pinpoint the cause of the ailments reported by veterans of the 1990-91 conflict, which are often dubbed Gulf War syndrome. The inquiry is funded by anonymous donations and is the first such investigation to take place without the official involvement of the government.

Last week the Ministry of Defence sent a letter to over 40 scientists who carry out government-sponsored research, asking them not to discuss unpublished results at the inquiry because such results would not have been scrutinized by other scientists yet. The memo also says that it would not be "appropriate" for government ministers or members of the armed forces to attend the investigation.



Pardon? Would not be appropriate, you say???

Could someone tell me whether the (British) government have any point here? Because I find it hard to accept this as it stands.
 
 
grant
13:08 / 27.07.04
From elsewhere in the same article, two bits that are relevant to our discussion here:

On how governments are viewing Gulf War Syndrome:
The US government has acknowledged that toxins used in the war may be responsible for Gulf War-related illnesses. By contrast, although the UK Ministry of Defence acknowledges that there are such illnesses, it does not recognize a single 'Gulf War syndrome' or a likely cause.



On possible causes:
Robert Haley of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, who has led much of the research into Gulf War illnesses, believes that a key cause of the soldiers' sickness was low-level exposure to the nerve gas sarin....

Several other factors have been implicated in the condition, including cocktails of military vaccines against anthrax and plague, organophosphate pesticides, depleted uranium in weapons and anti-nerve-gas tablets.

The article ends by saying soldiers returning from the current Iraq conflict are showing signs of post-traumatic stress disorder, but not the immune problems seen with Gulf Syndrome sufferers.

Me, I'd add "Yet" to the end of that.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
16:10 / 27.07.04
Grant - Although it looks dodgy it's also swimming in the calm seas of lackofcontextia, we have no way of knowing whether it's something that's not sinister at all (almost any business or department, once it's been screwed over by leaks, will put out stern notes to everyone saying "you shouldn't be leaking this stuff!" and science has had a rough time recently with MMR scares, F&M, etc) that's being picked up on as such an emotive subject.
 
 
grant
17:46 / 27.07.04
Well, what looks *really* dodgy is that this isn't a government research project. Leaks within a department are one thing -- this is telling scientists who are getting government funding for other things not to announce their findings in a non-government-funded (and non-govt-authorized) project. Is there some other, more extenuating context I should know about?
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
10:57 / 29.07.04
There is a very large and important issue surrounding GWS in the UK. It's essentially boils down to post service remuneration with respect to disability. As an ex service person one has the right to an enhanced pension to take into account any disease, disorder or disability which affects your quality/longevity of your life that is incurred as or has been in some way aggravated by a factor of service.

This is regardless of whether or not the armed services can be found culpable or not. It's understood that of you are still a serving member of the armed services then you require no additional remuneration as the quality of your life has not been sufficiently degraded as to prevent you earning a wage suitable to your needs.

An interesting situation exists here though. GWS is a combination of other symptoms. These symptoms are all accepted as medical conditions by the government and as such you can claim for them as per above. Not only that but you can also claim for them as being caused by service in the '91 Gulf War and provided your evidence supports your location and activity then it is likely that your application for an enhanced pension will be accepted.

I am reserved about civil suits for GWS though. Whilst I personally agree that the condition exists, such things to me are a reasonable occupational hazard for one serving in the armed forces. The events surrounding the possible causes of GWS as such that I don't believe they warrant sueing the government.
 
 
grant
19:31 / 22.10.04
America's Research Advisory Committee on Gulf Veteran's Illnesses says, Hey, it really exists!

They also add that it could possibly be due to exposure to sarin gas from an Iraqi weapons depot. Another possibility, they say, could be the result of troops being given a drug to protects them from nerve gas.

Charles Plumridge, National Gulf War Veterans and Families Association, UK, said “Most Gulf veterans both in the States and in Britain have been claiming this for many years but our claims seem to have fallen on deaf ears. We're just hoping that this report will open people's ears and they will listen to us in times to come."


So there's that.
 
 
grant
16:00 / 05.11.04
The official admission seems to be making some waves -- it's in New Scientist.

The central fact of the story is kind of creepy and outrageous, but helps clarify who thinks what about the disease:

Military pensions are awarded when someone’s disability or death can be proved to have been caused by service in the armed forces. ...

But for more than a decade, the UK, US, Australian and Canadian governments have disputed this, claiming that their symptoms are hard to attribute and often psychological in origin.

...Now the US authorities have changed their stance, prompted by recent American research which suggests there is a disease with a physical basis linked to chemical exposure in the Gulf.

The UK government still insists there is no link. But American researchers claim the studies the British are relying on were not designed in a way that would uncover the syndrome.


The official report is due out next week.
 
 
grant
18:10 / 22.11.04
And now, Nature has a Q&A feature on the report.

Here's an interesting chunk from the middle:
What is the crux of the debate?

Scientists have disputed whether we should describe the symptoms of veterans as 'Gulf War illnesses' or as a specific disease, called 'Gulf War syndrome'. The labelling depends on whether those who served in the conflict simply have a higher incidence of the usual types of war-related illnesses or whether they suffer from a new sickness, unique to the 1991 clash.

Medical experts generally refrain from naming a new disease or syndrome unless it has characteristics that clearly distinguish it from known ones. The medical community has still not agreed that those who served in this conflict face unique health threats or suffer from an exceptional illness.

However, the Berwick inquiry says that the evidence is now strong enough to describe the illnesses suffered by veterans as Gulf War syndrome. The word 'syndrome' is not confined to referring to a series of symptoms arising from a single cause, the authors point out. Moreover, they conclude that the Gulf War veterans suffered these symptoms to an unusual extent, meaning that their illness can justifiably be described as new.

Why has there been so much disagreement in the past?

With multiple symptoms and a wide range of possible causes, the existence of a single syndrome becomes difficult to pin down. Some scientists believe that Gulf War veterans may report more symptoms than other veterans because they get the idea of a unique disease from the media. Other experts think that those who served in the 1991 war merely suffer more post-traumatic stress than veterans of other conflicts.
 
 
grant
17:55 / 16.08.05
A new study shows Gulf War vets who were exposed to nerve agents during the March 1991 weapons demolitions in Khamisiyah, Iraq, have a higher chance of getting brain cancer.

So exposure to these kinds of weapons definitely has long-term effects.

Anyone come across any figures for the new Iraq War vets?
 
 
skolld
14:36 / 17.08.05
I'm skeptical of studies that don't show numbers. i'm curious how many people 'actually' died from brain cancer. Are we talking about 2or 3 people or 30? and depending on that number how many people out of 300,000 non-vets are at the same risk?

I have mixed feelings about GWS. I'm a vet from that war and am fully aware that the American government has a long history of not taking care of its veterans, Agent Orange victims, amputees, psychological disorders, etc.
So i can see how people would want to fault the government, however i'm just not convinced of the science behind much of the research on GWS. There are so many different symptoms and no real patterns to which soldiers are expressing those symptoms (i.e. a particular unit or soldiers distributed in a particular area of Iraq)
Soldiers in Southern Iraq that were exposed to the chemical depot could be explained as chemical exposure, but not an entirely new illness.
I think people came back from Iraq and Kuwait with some definite problems i would just like to see the causes pinpointed a little more.

The war today is quite a bit different from the first one. It will be interesting to see how well the government takes care of all the wounded in the years to come.
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
20:48 / 21.08.05
I've read a number of accounts of artificial sweeteners, aspartame/nutrasweet in particular, that have contributed to the toxic soup of chemicals that may have caused GWS1 (gulf war 1 syndrome)

apparently, if aspartame is exposed to heat (like, say, that in a war-torn desert country), it degrades into formic acid and formaldehyde (not sure on the chemistry of this, it may be formaldehyde then formic acid).

as the US military is the world's biggest polluter, is there any surprise that their "employees" are getting sick.

could be that long-term exposure to a complete mulligan's stew of toxic chemicals causes long-term strain on the body's health.

besides, aspartame is gawdawful stuff.
and Monsanto is evil.

ta
tenix
 
 
agent darkbootie
22:22 / 22.08.05
This is the second place I've heard the aspartame theory. Seems cans and cans of surplus diet coke baking in the desert sun don't do anyone any good.

Yes, aspartame is awful, awful stuff. Remember it was originally developed as a neurotoxin. I had to cut it out of my life completely when I realized it was giving me memory loss, brain fuzzes, and horrible mood swings. Damn the years it took me to figure out THAT.
 
 
macrophage
17:29 / 29.08.05
Alot of the drugs they gave out to the soldiers there may have had adverse side effects. There were using alot of Depeted Uranium Shellings in their weaponries. Also it was a very toxic and a dirty war, with biowarfare and the added bonus of Burnt Out Oil Fields. I knew a soldier with Gulf War Syndrome down in England he was a wreck but it is like anything you just have to fight for your right to a decent compensation and a decent pension off the pencil pushers, and go through what seems like a struggle to get any money owed back to you for the cause of fighting for alot of civvies in suits with alot of money in posh groups like Bilderburegers and the Carlyle. There's also classic Combat Shell Shock you know the PTSD condition. Wars have always been big business (it's the financiers and the Corporates who win-win), probablly why they want to employ the use of drones and robots and proper biomech suits in the future. Swings and roundabouts - lest us forget the past for we are condemned to repeat it. I think there should exist a proper (no govt or drug manufacturer) innoculations and the vaccinations that they were given, it's like the Seventies in Africa and North America look at the rise of Smallpox Vaccines due to the Centre of Disease Control and the World Health Organisation - they seem to make a perfect template/overlay also when combined with HIV and Hepatitis growth on Statistical Charts. Enough said.
 
 
macrophage
17:36 / 29.08.05
Alot of the drugs they gave out to the soldiers there may have had adverse side effects. There were using alot of Depeted Uranium Shellings in their weaponries.

Also it was a very toxic and a dirty war, with biowarfare and the added bonus of Burnt Out Oil Fields. I knew a soldier with Gulf War Syndrome down in England he was a wreck but it is like anything you just have to fight for your right to a decent compensation and a decent pension off the pencil pushers, and go through what seems like a struggle to get any money owed back to you for the cause of fighting for alot of civvies in suits with alot of money in posh groups like Bilderburegers and the Carlyle.

There's also classic Combat Shell Shock you know the PTSD condition. Wars have always been big business (it's the financiers and the Corporates who win-win), probablly why they want to employ the use of drones and robots and proper biomech suits in the future. Swings and roundabouts - lest us forget the past for we are condemned to repeat it.

I think there should exist a proper vaccines research board (non govt or drug manufacturer) to test innoculations and the vaccinations that they were given, it's like the Seventies in Africa and North America look at the rise of Smallpox Vaccines due to the Centre of Disease Control and the World Health Organisation - they seem to make a perfect template/overlay also when combined with HIV and Hepatitis growth on Statistical Charts. Enough said.

Go see Dr Alan Cantwell for info on the Smallpox - AIDS - Hepatitis connections, he is an eminent Gay American Doctor, he's not some Conspiracy Crank like some. He has very interesting theories about so called Gulf War Syndrome.

It will happen again until we vet the vaccines, and get proper monitors to monitor the Conflict (and let's face iot the UN seem puppets of the Americans) as in the Biowarfare Ratings.
 
 
Dances with Gophers
18:40 / 30.08.05
A study showing which units the effected troops were from may help to point to a cause. I mean was it across the board effecting units right across the theatre, those in the front line or those who went to particular areas?. Did it equally affect tank crews and the infantry who had to dismount and fight though areas where the air was full of DU dust?
 
 
grant
20:24 / 17.11.08
So, today CNN is reporting that the US government has finally concluded Gulf War Syndrome is real.
 
  
Add Your Reply